Aquino Administration vs.

Duterte Administration:
A Comparative Analysis on their Foreign Policies

Carlo Jayfer N. Caparros

A.B. Political Science

Introduction

The Foreign Policy of the Philippines has had a 360 degree turn when this populist from
Davao, Rodrigo Duterte, came into power. It can be clearly seen in the significant change in its
foreign relation with China. Accordingly, the two states have been antagonistic towards each
other as the previous administration by the then President Benigno Aquino III fought an uphill
battle with China. This was in response to China’s efforts to acquire part of the territory of the
smaller state, the Philippines. As a result, the Philippines, under the then President Benigno
“Noynoy” Aquino brought its giant opponent into a legal warfare. The Permanent Court of
Arbitration had been their battle ground. This was clearly a blow to the ego of the so called
“sleeping giant”. More importantly, the Philippines won the battle for territory in an international
court of law. As a result, China was enraged and probably was aiming for a knock-out punch
towards the Philippines as it was economically isolating the latter. Until May 2016 national
election in the Philippines happened and everything changed. As President Rodrigo Duterte
sworn in onto office, the once bitter and antagonistic relation of the Philippines and China
became rather cooperative if not predatory.

Now, amidst all territorial disputes and violation of sovereignty, the Philippines, through
its temperamental president, is pushing for a greater and closer political and economic ties with
China. Billions of trade assistance and “soft loans” were granted to the Philippines and was
assured of a long wish list of projects. Accordingly, the Philippine government is eyeing for forty
(40) infrastructure projects to be funded or assisted by China. Finance Secretary Carlos G.
Dominguez III explained that fifteen (15) of the prospect projects are subject for financial loans
while twenty five (25) other projects are seeking for fund assistance. Among the projects which
are to be funded by China are a $3.01 billion North-South Railway, a $374.03 million dam
project in Quezon City and a $53.6 million irrigation project in the provinces of Cagayan and
Kalinga respectively (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017).

Hence, there is a conundrum at hand that needs to be analyzed. The behavior of the
Philippines towards China is rather questionable given the fact that the latter has been building
and militarizing in the West Philippine Sea which legally belongs to the former. Also, the
Philippine President, who is considered to be the chief diplomat, needs to be checked whether his
foreign policy still reflects the national interest.

Alongside the contrasting foreign policy towards China of the Aquino and Duterte
administration, the two administrations have rather opposing sides in building the Phillipine
allies. On one hand, the Aquino administration enjoyed the support and help of the Unites States
of America and other western states as its long standing allies. The Philippine-US Enhanced
Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) highlighted the friendly ties of the Philippines with
US. In addition, the Aquino administration had successfully created a link in the European Union
through the PH-EU Cooperation Agreement. Hence, the Philippines continued to march with its
traditional allies in the West. Interestingly, the current President Rodrigo Duterte has pushed for
a rather unorthodox foreign policy as he steer the country away from the West but to its neighbor
in the north, China.

Run Down of Events

In 2014, the then President Bengino “Noynoy” Aquino III dropped bombs as he explicitly
compared China to Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler. He categorically condemned all of
China’s aspirations regarding the West Philippine Sea which they claim to be part of China
through their nine-dash line. In addition, he particularly mentioned the April 2012 tension
between the Philippine Navy and Chinese forces as an overstepping to Philippine sovereignty.
Accordingly, in April 2012, the Philippine Navy met a team of Chinese fishing ships within the
Scarborough Shoal. The Philippine Navy was supposed to arrest the Chinese fishing vessels as
they were alleged to be poaching. However, the Chinese marine surveillance ships prevented the
Philippine Navy from doing so. The standoff lasted for about a month until the Philippine forces
retreated while the Chinese ships continued their stay in a territory which legally belongs to the
Philippines (Tiezzi, 2014).

Furthermore, the Philippines filed a formal complaint before the Permanent Court of
Arbitration in The Hague in 2014. Accordingly, the Philippines was pushing for invalidation of
China’s nine-dash line. The then Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Secretary Albert del
Rosaria explained that the formal complaint of the Philippines is about 4,000 pages in length.
This voluminous case includes legal remedies that the Philippines invoke and other documentary
proofs that will strengthen its claim. In addition, filing a formal petition is only one of the
Philippines’ strategies. It was also trying to draw attention from the international media to put
China in the international spotlight because of its violations and overstepping to Philippine
sovereignty (Tiezzi, 2014).

Moreover, the previous administration in the Philippines sought help from its long
standing ally, the United States of America. In fact, both the United States and the Philippine
remarked that China violated the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China
Sea (DoC) and that the latter was an impediment to the resolution of the territorial disputes in the
South China Sea. Department of Defense Undersecretary Pio Lorenzo Batino said that the
Philippine has little to no option but to increase its military capabilities through the help of
United States (Parameswaran, 2015). Alongside this, the Aquino administration had been
continuously strengthening the military ties of the Philippines with US through a military
cooperation agreement signed by the said countries.

To strongly affirm that the Philippines condemns the active, if not aggressive, behavior of
China in the West Philippine Sea, the Philippine Government expels sixteen (16) Chinese experts
who all work in the National Grid Corporation of the Philippines. The then Department of
Energy Secretary Carlos Jericho Petilla explained that the government will not renew the visas of
the said sixteen (16) Chinese experts and further stated that the Filipinos deserve more to work in
NGCP. Hence, the Aquino administration in general has been tough in upholding what is due to
the Philippines. Despite having no military capabilities that could match China, the Philippines
was still relatively successful for winning before an international court of law regarding the
disputed West Philippine Sea. Ultimately, Aquino’s administration worked strategically to
sustain its economy by building allies and seeking help from the international community amidst
conflicts with its giant neighbor on the north.

Behavioralism contends that Foreign Policy should be analyzed base on the behavior of
individual or the group that is acting in structured domestic machinery. Hence, according to this
theory, the behavior of state, including the way it relates to other states, is heavily influenced by
the people in the government. Thus, a change of administration or people in the government
perhaps will also bring a change in the state’s behavior. This was true in the case of Philippines.
When the current president, Rodrigo Duterte came in, he downplayed, if not reverse, all efforts
of his predecessor.

In May 2016, before the national election in the Philippines happens, Ford (2016) wrote
that the Philippines is in an ambiguous position as the then leading presidential candidate,
expressed a rather different approach towards the Philippine-China relation. He reported that
Rodrigo Duterte argued that the maritime activities of China should be addressed through
bilateral talks. Completely different from the strategic multi-track approach of the Aquino
administration, Duterte’s plan is rather naïve and self-defeating. Accordingly, it would be a great
advantage to China if the Philippines will opt to engage in bilateral negotiations with them.
Primarily, having the Philippine with no military power that could match them, China could
easily press its claim in the disputed territorial region.

Notably, President Duterte has made clear in the early start of this presidency that he will
pursue an independent foreign policy. Specifically, he will steer the country away from the
United States. One may commend the president for his foreign relation tactics as it was reflected
in Article 2, Section 7 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. However, this was a bold-faced lie as
he is extending arms to China for greater political and economic ties. Straightforwardly,
President Duterte announced that there will be a “point of no return” in the Philippine-US
relations (Ranada, 2016). Hence, what he meant by his word of pursuing an independent foreign
policy is just moving away from one superpower state to another, which considerably is more
nefarious.
 Incongruent to his plans of building closer ties with China, President Duterte said that
there will come a time that he will invoke the ruling of the international court of arbitration over
the West Philippine Sea. It is as if he was just testing the water before discussing the issue with
China through diplomatic bilateral talks. In his words, he said “hindi ko kayo ipapasubo… hindi
ko kayo ipapahiya.” referring to the Filipinos (Ranada 2016). However, having him in office for
almost two years, there is a quandary if he is still testing the water or he has turn tail and submit
himself to China instead.

In the October 2016 visit of the Philippine President to China, Duterte proudly went
home as he was able to close a multi-billion deal of business and financial, as well as
developmental assistance with the Chinese government. However, in spite of all of this, there
was one important issue that he failed to bring up, the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea)
dispute. He was unable to make China commit that they will allow small-scale Filipino
fishermen to fish in Scarborough Shoal (Panatag Shoal), which in the first place is due to them
(Ranada, 2016).

The Philippines, now more than ever, has been economically and politically drawn closer
to China. This is despite the fact that Chinese government have been building and militarizing in
the West Philippine Sea. They are even expressing their interest over the Philippine Rise as they
recently named five (5) features of the undersea territory. Thus, the Philippine-China relation is a
very ironic, if not toxic, foreign relations.

Not only did the current administration move closer to China, it also soured its foreign
relation with its long standing allies, the US and EU. On October 20, 2016, the Philippine
president announces his economic and military “separation” with the US. Boldly, he repeatedly
curses at the US and EU for criticizing his bloody war on drugs. Even the United Nations was
not spared from his bad-mannered rhetoric. More so, President Duterte approves a
recommendation to reject a P13.85 billion (250 million euros) from the European Union in
exchange for the adherence to the law in relation to his campaign against illegal drugs. In
addition, President Duterte may have gone too far as he forged alliance with Russia.
Analysis

The territorial conflict over the South China Sea, now called West Philippine Sea, is
perhaps the most significant conflict the Philippines faces. Hence, this issue should be the
starting ground in analyzing the foreign policies of the Aquino and Duterte administration
respectively. The different, if not contrasting foreign policy of the Aquino and Duterte
Administration may be viewed and analyzed from different vantage point and through different
lenses. One good point of view which it could be viewed from is through Dependency Theory.
Primarily, dependency theory puts a clear line in the world politics and sees two kinds of states-
the dependent states and the dominant states. It can also be called the core and the periphery or
the metropolitan and the satellite. Essentially, the dominant states are always the advanced
industrial nations such as the US and other western countries. On the other side, the dependent
states are those states in Latin America, Asia, and Africa which have a relatively low gross low
per capita gross national product. In addition, dependency theory argues that the economic and
political undertakings of dependent states are heavily influenced by external factors as such
multinational corporations, foreign assistance, international trade market which are controlled by
the highly industrialized states. In a simply language, this theory explains that the dependent
countries, having no economic power, seek help from the developed states. Consequently, the
help that the developed states extend to the dependent states are with strings attached. The
developed states are able to press their interest and even exploit the states that depend on them.

The Philippines, being a developing country from the start, has also had a help from other
states. Conventionally, it has enjoyed a close link with the west particularly with its former
colonizer, the United States of America. The Aquino administration has particularly made the
best use of this long standing relation with the US as tension between China arises in the South
China Sea. Facing an imminent threat from a military giant, the then President Benigno Aquino
invoked the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty in the hope of strengthening the military powers of the
Philippines. In 2014, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement was made between the two
states. Furthermore, the US, under the presidency of Barrack Obama, committed to aid the
Armed Forces of the Philippines Capability Upgrade Program. Alongside this, the US
government had also extended monetary aid to the Philippines. In 2010, the Philippines received
a $434- million grant.
 Accordingly, the Aquino presidency has brought improvements in the economy of the
Philippines. It was even tagged as a rising economy of Asia. However, the Philippines remains a
dot over China which is a military giant. Hence, the best possible option the Aquino
administration took was to depend on the US. The US in return, is more than willing to help the
Philippines fight the aggressive efforts of China over the South China Sea. The US government
will not allow the dominating China to have a unilateral control in the disputed region as it will
infringe with the personal interest of US.

The Duterte administration is no different. The Philippines, is still dependent on a

superpower state. Although Duterte’s foreign policy is significantly different, if not opposing, to
Aquino’s foreign policy, the Philippines just changed its masters - China. China, accordingly, is
regarded to replace the US as the world’s superpower. Not only does China have a gigantic
military capability, its economy is exponentially booming. It is reported that China is a giant
invertor in the US having more than $1 trillion (about 5%) of US debt.

A strong indicator of the Philippines’ dependency on China is its Build Build Build
programs. Accordingly, billions of soft and hard loans were given to the Philippines. Instead of
continuing the efforts of the Aquino administration to fight China, President downplayed it or
even reversed.

Conclusion

The foreign policy of the Aquino and Duterte Administration respectively are more
opposing than complimentary. The Philippines under the then President Benigno Aquino
continued its alliance with the West while President Rodrigo Duterte maneuvered the country
closer to China. However, through the lens of dependency theory, the foreign policies of the two
administrations were essentially similar in a sense that the Philippines is dependent on a
superpower. The change of presidency has only caused a change of master but not an
improvement of economic and political position. The Philippines was and still is a dependent
state, a periphery, or a satellite state not capable of solving its problems without outside help
from an economically rich and militarily secured state such as the US and China.